European Principles Of Due Process Shoved Aside To Hunt Down Pirate Bay Founder

In the upcoming extradition request against Gottfrid Svartholm-Warg, co-founder of The Pirate Bay, Danish judicial authorities are disregarding an important acquittal in Swedish courts. This is remarkable, as European courts are bound to respect each others’ verdicts. It’s not hard to get the gut feeling that the establishment unites against the troublemakers and pushes all its safeguards aside, letting rights only apply to the Goliaths and not the Davids.

In the European Union, there is the principle of accepting the law enforcement and due process of law in other member states. There is an underlying assumption that the Greek justice system is safe and secure; there is an underlying assumption that the Bulgarian police is not corrupt. These assumptions are made because it’s necessary – even if they should happen to be outright proven false, the assumptions must still remain in place.

The reason is simple: if not, the Europan Arrest Warrant wouldn’t work at all. (The EAW is a tool which is abused casually in the European member states these days.) Otherwise, you wouldn’t be able to propose tools like the European Investigation Order. (Which, for example, would force the Swedish police to investigate an Irish or Polish woman in Sweden suspected of breaking her home country’s ban on abortions, a women’s right which is sacrosanct in Sweden.) Otherwise, the European Union would not be able to progress with its plans on a European Prosecution Office.

But apparently, there are exceptions to the rule – when the Powers That Be want to really, really nail somebody hard.

Over to Gottfrid Svartholm-Warg. He’s convicted of electronic trespassing in Sweden (against Logica). But the Appeals Court has acquitted him from another case, against Nordea, following the expert testimony of Jacob Appelbaum who testified the prosecutorial technical evidence to be abysmally insufficient.

Let’s focus on the case against Nordea. The Appeals Court considered the prosecutor’s evidence unsatisfactory, and acquitted Svartholm-Warg. That should be it then, right?

But no: there is still a request from Denmark for Svartholm-Warg’s extradition – for investigation and trial concerning a case built on the exact same evidence and circumstances as the Nordea case. That is, the exact same thing he was just acquitted from in Sweden.

That, in itself, is both peculiar and inappropriate.

Besides, all of a sudden, the European Union’s principles of accepting the judicial authorities of other Member States have ceased being in effect. As long as the Danish extradition request to Sweden is active, the State of Denmark is rejecting the integrity, legitimacy, and competence of the Swedish justice system. (Which is rather remarkable between European member states.)

Everything is as usual in the European Union: the rules only apply if they benefit the big guy.

And in Denmark, both the Minister of Justice and the Minister of the Interior have made public statements that they consider Svartholm-Warg guilty. Just so that the Danish police and courts know what they have to abide by.

Here, it’s important to keep in mind that it’s a suspicion of identical actions, equally illegal in both countries. Therefore, it would be rather absurd if Svartholm-Warg was acquitted in one country and convicted in the other.

I suspect things are working like this: High-profile electronic trespassing (“hacking”, sloppily) is an embarrassment that requires somebody to be crucified – regardless of whether it’s the right guy or not. And the State of Denmark might consider it a bonus to cause extra trouble for one of the guys behind The Pirate Bay. This isn’t justice, this is politics.

Uhm, say again? You’re saying the Appeals Court made a mistake when it listened to an expert witness who rejected the evidence wholesale – “if this investigation had been made by one of my students, I would have failed them”?

I think your comment is an excellent example of people who consider it necessary for Revenge Of The Establishment Against A Disruptor to take precedence before any and all due process of law.

And frankly, I think that’s scary as all hell. That means might makes right, that competition and entrepreneurship are only goals as long as they don’t threaten the kings of the hill, and that laws are only for show.

Cheers,
Rick

Kristina Svartholm

October 7, 2013

Did you read the report from the Swedish police/SÄPO, concerning the investigation of Gottfrid’s computer? The report didn’t recognize any of the (more than) 170 ways that the fire wall configuration allowed remote control in, and it didn’t recognize the computer working as a server, open for many others.

Danish politicians and Danish police have told media (and the police also Gottfrid himself) that there were incriminating things found on his computor – but Appelbaum’s witnessing & the thereafter following judgement from the Swedish Appeal Court makes it clear that he can’t be made responsible for whatever has been found in it.

When you “…hope.. that he gets sentenced to a couple of years…” – do you smell blood, or what other kind of feelings do you want to express? – Honestly, I get scared, just as Rick ,when encountering people that reason like you. But hopefully you are not as bad as your comment suggests!

Anonymous

October 7, 2013

what frightens me is that just because someone has money, or power or position or friends with any of those things, can totally disregard what parts of the law they want, and interpret parts of the law in ways that they want. this is what has been so frightening about the way the NSA has been conducting surveillance on whoever it wanted to and also making laws up/changing laws to suit the crimes. when this sort of thing can be done, surely it shows that the legal system is falling apart. the entertainment industries are already guilty of having ‘innocent unless proven guilty’ completely changes around, so that people are now ‘guilty, unless able to afford to have someone prove their innocence. and remember what we are talking about here, more often than not, is the sharing of a music track or a movie!
laws were changed/added so as to make them fair. so that those with money could not just go to a policeman or a court and get ‘default judgements’ issued against those that were unable or less able to influence decisions by bribing the decision maker. that is how the law has been for centuries. it has now been thrown completely away, in favor, yet again, of those with the most money! how degrading is that to our supposedly more honest and open way of life?? it is a fucking disgrace that those in charge of governments and law enforcement could allow it to happen, regardless of whether their was personal gain involved or not!!

Freedom Fighter

December 4, 2014

It doesn’t matter if you believe the appeals court made a mistake. The point is that citizens everywhere are in danger, and our rights and legal protections mean absolutely nothing if we allow the establishment to break it’s own rules whenever it sees fit. Even if the Swedish court did make a mistake, it’s a much larger mistake, with dire implications for the entire concept of freedom, to allow due process of law to be subverted based solely on the perceptions and accusations of those in power. Your stance supports the corruption that has been allowed to flourish in our governments, and yet you are “nervous” about that fact that a concerned, educated, member of parliament sees what’s happening here as a classic example of the authorities abusing their power by setting aside laws when and as they see fit. If anything that should be viewed as even further evidence that what is happening here is not only wrong, but it poses a serious threat to civil liberty around the entire world. Slippery slope doesn’t even begin to cover it.

And if the people reading this follow the logic behind your blind faith in the establishment through to completion, then we end up with the inevitable conclusion that we don’t need a legal system at all. Actually your brilliance has given me a wonderful idea. Why don’t we just trust the prosecutor’s assessment of EVERY situation, and we can save ourselves billions in tax dollars by simply abolishing due process altogether and canning all the judges. Plus no more jury duty for anyone! And we can put all that money we’re saving building and maintaining larger prisons ; )

Either you are completely ignorant to the inherent danger of allowing the authorities to run rough shod over citizens that they perceive as guilty, or you are being employed by international elite 1% to spread disinformation and create a false sense of public sympathy for the atrocities that the authorities are being allowed to commit. My suspicion is leaning toward that latter.

Caleb Lanik

October 7, 2013

As you described the European Investigation Order I could not help but be reminded of the Fugitive Slave Act which required the northern states to enforce laws which they at least officially found reprehensible. An escaped slave had, prior to the law’s enaction been free if he or she made it to a northern state, after one had to flee all the way to Canada.

Freedom Fighter

December 4, 2014

First off, did you seriously just compare information sharing to human slave trading? Secondly, if you truly believe that a state/country should have the right to ignore laws created by neighboring states on the grounds that they disagree, then you are essentially opposed to the very existence of tools like the European Arrest Warrant, European investigation Order, and the entire principal of following the legal decisions that have been established by neighboring states, which is a discussion for another time. And finally, the question isn’t whether or not these tools/rules should exist. The question is: Should the establishment be allowed to enforce rules only when it’s convenient for them? If the rules and protections are going to exist, then they need to apply to EVERYONE at ALL times, and we as citizens can’t afford to tolerate the abuse of our legal system by those in power. After all, it’s the ONLY thing protecting our liberties. THAT is the point.

Zadok

October 7, 2013

Even if he is guilty of the crimes accused, the disregard for Swedish law is a serious problem in its own right. What the author is saying is that the gentleman is NOT guilty and that the Danes are pursuing a politically motivated vendetta. The fact that they violate European law is just the icing on the cake.

Fenixius

October 7, 2013

So hang on, he was acquitted in Case A, and in Upcoming Case B with functionally identical evidence, he’s still being arrested and summonsed? That sounds fine… nothing seems to prevent police from laying a charge which isn’t likely to succeed (except maybe whoever manages the police’s money; they’ll likely be upset!). There’s no double-jeapardy occurring here, is there?

Assuming not, then if the system of verdict-respecting works as I’m reading it, then his lawyer will open with ‘This Case B is the same as Case A, so all that expert testimony applies’, and then Svartholm-Warg walks out of the court an hour later, right?

Freedom Fighter

December 4, 2014

In theory, that is how the system is designed to work. In practice, however, it would appear that all of that is out the window when the establishment arbitrarily decides to make an example out of someone whom it is unable to obtain a legal conviction on.

Semantics, perhaps, but it’s most certainly a Member State in the European Union.

Cheers,
Rick

EU Sucks

October 15, 2013

Denmark is only a partial member of the EU, Denmark has four exemptions very important ones.
1. Denmark will not be bound by the rules concerning economic policy which apply to Member States participating in EMU.
2. Denmark will retain its existing powers in the field of monetary policy according to its national laws and regulations.
3. Denmark will participate fully in the second stage of EMU and will continue to participate in exchange-rate cooperation within the European Monetary System (EMS).
4. Denmark retains the capacity to pursue its own policies with regard to distribution of income and social welfare.

The implications are many and grey, hopefully the union part of EU will die soon and we can get back to free trade and free people/countries this EU project is a dead fish.

Freedom Fighter

December 4, 2014

Those are vague exemptions yes, but clearly they are all very specifically geared toward maintaining independence in the area of currency. By no stretch of the imagination could his supposed crimes be interpreted as currency-related. Now if he was the founder of bit coin and was accused of fraud, then that might be a different story. But there is no gray zone in the distinction between information exchange/file sharing VS the creation, distribution, exchange rate, etc… of currency. Any judges that try to use that rationale to justify a corrupt decision should be vilified.

“Everything is as usual in the European Union: the rules only apply if they benefit the big guy.”

Yes, and everything is as usual in Sweden. The media shuts up about it. Is it the same way in Denmark?

Anonymous

October 7, 2013

‘This isn’t justice, this is politics.’

‘competition and entrepreneurship are only goals as long as they don’t threaten the kings of the hill, and that laws are only for show.’

the one thing that you haven’t mentioned, maybe purposefully, is that this whole trial, based on what has to be concocted evidence, has only come about because of what happened in Sweden in the very first trial against TPB 4. that trial and every trial since has been a complete joke! there hasn’t been any real evidence put forward that would be strong enough, against anyone else, to gain a conviction.

as for this being politically motivated, you may be right. i personally think that if that is the case, the political people (powerful politicians in more than one country) are still in the hooks of the USA entertainment industries and Hollywood! that is where the real threat is coming from! they have done the same to these 4 guys as they then thought (and may well still do) they may well be able to do against Kim Dotcom. one of the major differences in the cases being that TPB4 didn’t have the financial resources to defend themselves that Dotcom does have. you then have to remember that the head of the MPAA in the US is an ex-congressman. he will have called in favors to achieve what he wants and lied through his back teeth to get actions taken against these. what is needed, more than ever now, is a real investigation into who is behind all of this shit! nothing like this would happen if it were not for those back scratchers scratching backs of the powerful. the even more shameful thing is that the reach of these industries has gone to almost every corner of the globe. if this doesn’t stink of a conspiracy of the greatest order, i dont know what does! absolutely nothing like this happened until, suddenly, the entertainment industries started to get more and more convictions of people and places, both on and off the internet, against people who shared files. once it started, the law became x100 worse for convictions. people were suddenly expected to pay $150,000 fines and be imprisoned just for sharing, a trait that all humans have had since time began, without which, no progress would ever have been made in anything! it needs stopping now, and damn fast! the EU needs to jump on this and never let it’s like occur again, just because someone has either said they will help someone else or to have personal gain.

Anonymous

October 9, 2013

so, the question is, will the EU allow this to happen or not and if not (as should be the case), what steps are going to be taken to

a) ensure it never occurs again

b) investigate so as to find out who was the driving force behind this ‘other case’?

c) find out who was behind the whole debacle?

this whole sorry incident stems from certain countries agreeing to do what the USA couldn’t. rather than stand up for it’s own citizens, Sweden sailed them down the river, with a trial sat on and ruled on by a bias judge, just to get a guilty verdict. it also sailed the EU down the river by doing what the USA wanted, as to what should have been done by EU members. not only that, but as it didn’t get the punishments it wanted it drummed up totally ridiculous extra charges. now we have another member state doing the same thing, just so the punishment can be lengthened.
the only way this can be legal or tolerated by the EU is if they are in on the USA plot as well. if that is the case, then there is no hope for anyone, because, as big and as powerful as the EU is, it is allowing the USA to rule over not just it, but just about the whole Democratic World and that scares the fucking crap out of me!!

Freedom Fighter

December 4, 2014

You should be concerned, but not about the USA’s involvement. The sad fact is that all “civilized” nations from Russia, to China, to the USA to members of the EU are so far in debt to the international banks, the World Bank, the IMF, etc… because of the debt cycle we allowed them to create with the current monetary production system, that they are all effectively owned. And those same owners, namely the banking families have controlling interests in Hollywood and media industries. None of those countries print their own money. Look it up. They allow the private, totally unregulated banks to print it for them, and they borrow it at interest. It’s an age old scam, that ultimately leads to only one place: One world government with a corporate congress that may or may not decide to rule in secret, and the creation of more debt than the worlds citizens will ever be able to “work off”.

Freedom Fighter

December 4, 2014

You should be concerned, but not about the USA’s involvement. The sad fact is that all “civilized” nations from Russia, to China, to the USA to members of the EU are so far in debt to the international banks, the World Bank, the IMF, etc… because of the debt cycle we allowed them to create with the current monetary production system, that they are all effectively owned. And those same owners, namely the banking families have controlling interests in Hollywood and media industries. None of those countries print their own money. Look it up. They allow the private, totally unregulated banks to print it for them, and they borrow it at interest. It’s an age old scam, that ultimately leads to only one place: One world government with a corporate congress that will be able to rule in secret, accountable to no one, and the creation of more debt than the worlds citizens will ever be able to “work off”. This whole case has caused those powers to show just how far their tentacles have spread in our complacency.

Thomas

October 12, 2013

I think you forgot to mention that the case in Denmark is a completely different case. Different victim, different motives and different circumstances. The technical evidence is only one part of the trial. For me it is perfectly reasonable that a Danish crime victim can have his case tried in court.
I also think that you forgot to mention that Swartholm Warg was convicted in Sweden for breaching the integrity of some 10 000 persons with “protected identity”. These are persons who really need the integrity for their security. And still you fail to mention that, despite your claims that you are the sole protector of private integrity?
But I guess an old buddy is more important than the rights of the 10 000 victims of his actions……
Seems to be very close to friendship corruption?

scandinavianpirate

October 13, 2013

At first we must consider the recent NSA leaks which clearly put the burden of proof a lot higher than before. Can it be shown that he (Gottfrid) personally executed the computer commands? If not, it may well have been a subversion by one of the many recently exposed back-doors. To try and make him look like a criminal by having it look like it was his computer who did the hacking. Clearly there is demand for such a hacking job. I mean we have all seen the vast resources put into the pirate bay trial.

“These are persons who really need the integrity for their security.”

How do you know that, if they are secret? That’s the problem of things being secret or censored – you can’t tell if it’s true without breaking the secrecy.

It could be people who have been threatened by criminals, but it could also be people who want to stay in the shadows because they will have political corruption charges coming if they are exposed.

Thomas

October 14, 2013

Have you heard about Catch 22?
Your logic is similar. Persons who need protected identity ( A swedish legal term, translated) are probably faking, and therefore it is ok to breach their integrity.

But you are touching the critical problem, that you pirates don’t seem to understand.
There must be a balance between integrity and transparency. We need both, but if we go to far for integrity, we will loose transparency and the other way around.
This is the challenge that you pirates either don’t understand or just don’t care about.

Freedom Fighter

December 4, 2014

Now I’m not a lawyer, but it would seem to me that you can have a different motive with different circumstances and victims. But if the technical evidence linking to the crime has already been found deficient by a competent legislative body, then you don’t have a case. Hell you don’t even have a suspect.

It would appear the validity of the technical “evidence” was dismissed by expert analysis due to signs that suggested that it was or could have been deliberately planted by someone who desired a frame-up.

It’s time to wake up and smell the coffee folks. The powers that be aren’t spending these kinds of resources to persecute this man because they really care about the privacy of 10,000 citizens. Those same people wipe their asses with our privacy every day via the patriot act, the department of homeland security, etc… What a joke. They only thing they care about is the crime of supporting file sharing, one which they know they won’t be able to obtain a legal conviction on. So they concocted this half-assed frame up, which doesn’t even make sense. If you ran an organization as large and successful as the Pirate Bay, would you jeopardize that by violating the privacy of a few citizens? Even if you were totally evil, you wouldn’t do it, because there’s just not enough profit to be made in selling peoples information to justify the risk, and you’d be smart enough to recognize that. Therefore, I would argue that this man has no clear motive. The establishment’s motives, however, in creating a sloppy frame-up job to crucify this man are easily recognizable

An Indipendent Researcher

October 19, 2013

To any analytical observer who has taken the time to do some reading, it is clear crystal as the light of the day that what is happening to Svartholm is a pure fabrication (which has all the classic variables in it), and an example of how the system can be manipulated by the powerful when their interests are in jeopardy. The Denmark chapter of this story, will only show how far this system is willing to go, and thereby, how important is (or is not) to them to save some face. Svartholm is clearly an intellectual young person of the highest morals and ideals who wants a better world. But then, so was Jordano Bruno.

Meta

All text on this site is under a Creative Commons Zero license ("public domain"). That includes any comments you submit. Articles are protected by the Swedish Constitution's Freedom of Press, but visitor comments are the submitter's own responsibility. Powered by Probewise.